alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.5


 


ANDREW CORPORATION


EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT PLAN AGREEMENT


 


THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of July, 2004, by and between Andrew
Corporation (the “Company”) and Jeff Gittelman (the “Executive”),


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Andrew Corporation Executive
Severance Benefit Plan, as amended and restated effective May 14, 2004 (the
“Plan”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Executive has been designated as an eligible participant
in the Plan;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Executive and Company hereby agree as follows:


 


1.                                       Plan
Benefits.  The Executive has been
designated as a TIER III Participant in the Plan and shall be eligible solely
for the benefits set forth therein applicable to TIER III Participants.  The receipt of such benefits shall be subject
to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan, including, but not
limited to, terms related to the amount, time and form of benefits.  By execution of this Agreement, the
Executive agrees to be bound by the provisions of the Plan, as amended and
restated effective May 14, 2004, and as may be subsequently amended.


 


2.                                       Arbitration.  The Executive acknowledges that
Section 7.2 of the Plan contains an arbitration provision, and by
execution of this Agreement agrees to be bound by the terms of such arbitration
provision.


 


3.                                       Plan
Not Contract of Employment.  The
Plan does not constitute a contract of employment and nothing in the Plan shall
be construed to give the Executive the right to be retained by the Company or
to any benefits not specifically provided by the Plan.


 


4.                                       Plan
Supercedes Prior Change in Control Severance Agreements.  The Executive acknowledges and agrees that
the benefits and terms set forth in the May 14, 2004 restatement of the Plan,
as applicable to the Participant based on the Tier designated in paragraph 1
above, are a replacement for and in lieu of any benefits to which the Executive
may have been entitled under the Plan prior to its restatement or under any
other agreement with the Company relating to Change in Control severance
benefits.  The Executive further
acknowledges such benefits and terms may be subsequently amended pursuant to
Section 7.1 of the Plan.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the date first above written.


 


	
  EXECUTIVE

  	
  ANDREW CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ M. Jeffrey Gittelman

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Ralph E. Faison

  	
   

  
	
  , individually

  	
   

  	
  By: Ralph E. Faison

  
	
   

  	
  Its: President & Chief Executive Officer
Zuaytavious A. MORRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3733

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 3, 2019

Candice Brower, Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel Region One, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Barbara Debelius, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Bilbrey, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
November 25, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

LARRLYON DESHUN WILLIAMS, Appellant

NO. 14-13-00149-CR

NO. 14-13-00150-CR

NO. 14-13-00156-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Traci Lynne CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3506

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed November 16, 2018

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Andrew Mich, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lori N. Hagan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*639We affirm Appellant's judgment and sentence but remand for correction of a scrivener's error. Section 3 of the amended order of probation should reflect that following Appellant's period of incarceration, she is to be placed on regular probation, not drug offender probation.

AFFIRMED; REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER's ERROR.

TORPY, EVANDER and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 23




            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement
No. 333-67956 on Form S-8 of EvergreenBancorp, Inc. of our report dated
February 25, 2006 appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
EvergreenBancorp, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2005.


                                        /s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLC
                                        --------------------------------
                                        Crowe Chizek and Company LLC



Oak Brook, Illinois
March 15, 2006
EX-10.1







Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVENTEEN TO

THE METLIFE PLAN FOR TRANSITION ASSISTANCE FOR OFFICERS



THE METLIFE PLAN FOR TRANSITION ASSISTANCE FOR OFFICERS (the “Plan”) is hereby amended as follows:





	 	1.	 	The Plan is hereby amended by restating subsection 1.4.05(b)(4) in its entirety
to read as follows:
	 
	 	 	 	“(4) the termination of employment of an Employee who has
entered into a written employment contract or severance agreement
with the Company or a MetLife Enterprise Affiliate.”
	 
	 	2.	 	The Plan is hereby amended by adding the following to subsection 1.4.09:
	 
	 	 	 	“(i) is an Employee but is not eligible to participate in
or receive benefits under the 2008 MetLife Dental Integration
Severance Plan.”
	 
	 	3.	 	This amendment shall be effective as of June 1, 2008.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this amendment to be executed by an officer thereunto
duly authorized on the date noted below the officer’s signature.




METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY



By: /s/ Debra Capolarello                    



Date: 6/3/08                                         



Witness:
/s/ Lucida Bullard
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 530 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 530

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         April 2, 2014.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2575) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 to repeal the 30-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee 
for purposes of the employer mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable 
Care Act and replace it with 40 hours. All points of order against consideration 
of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended 
by the Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be considered 
as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of 
order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) three 
hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with 
or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Simon Ridgway, Chief Executive Officer of Radius Gold Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



1.

This Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2.

The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:    May 7, 2014





/s/ Simon Ridgway ____________________

Simon Ridgway,

Chief Executive Officer
Letter Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.61 
 [ * ] = CERTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED BY BRACKETS, HAS BEEN OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION PURSUANT TO RULE 24B-2 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS
AMENDED. 
 June 12, 2008 
 Dr. Diana Wetmore

 Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Therapeutics, Inc. 
 6931 Arlington
Road 
 Bethesda, MD 20814 
 Dear Dr. Wetmore: 

The purpose of this letter (“Letter”) is to further amend the Study Funding Agreement, between the undersigned parties, dated June 17, 2003, as amended
(the “Agreement”). By signing below, the undersigned parties agree to the following: 
 In Section 8.1(c) of the Agreement,
[ * ] shall be replaced with [ * ]. 
 All other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and are in full force and effect.

  

							
	HOLLIS-EDEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
				
	By:	 	 /s/    Robert W. Weber
	 		 	Date: 6/12/08
		 	Robert W. Weber	 		 	
		 	Interim Chief Financial Officer,	 		 	
		 	Chief Accounting Officer and	 		 	
		 	Vice President, Operations	 		 	

 Agreed to and Acknowledged by: 
  

							
	CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION THERAPEUTICS, INC.
				
	By:	 	 /s/    Robert J. Beall
	 		 	Date: 6/25/08
		 	Robert J. Beall, Ph.D.	 		 	
		 	President and CEO
EXHIBIT 10.6


 


ANDREW CORPORATION


EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT PLAN AGREEMENT


 


THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of July, 2004, by and between Andrew
Corporation (the “Company”) and John DeSana (the “Executive”),


 


WITNESSETH:


 


WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Andrew Corporation Executive
Severance Benefit Plan, as amended and restated effective May 14, 2004 (the
“Plan”); and


 


WHEREAS, the Executive has been designated as an eligible participant
in the Plan;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Executive and Company hereby agree as follows:


 


1.                                       Plan
Benefits.  The Executive has been
designated as a TIER II Participant in the Plan and shall be eligible solely
for the benefits set forth therein applicable to TIER II Participants.  The receipt of such benefits shall be
subject to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan, including,
but not limited to, terms related to the amount, time and form of
benefits.  By execution of this
Agreement, the Executive agrees to be bound by the provisions of the Plan, as
amended and restated effective May 14, 2004, and as may be subsequently
amended.


 


2.                                       Arbitration.  The Executive acknowledges that
Section 7.2 of the Plan contains an arbitration provision, and by
execution of this Agreement agrees to be bound by the terms of such arbitration
provision.


 


3.                                       Plan
Not Contract of Employment.  The
Plan does not constitute a contract of employment and nothing in the Plan shall
be construed to give the Executive the right to be retained by the Company or
to any benefits not specifically provided by the Plan.


 


4.                                       Plan
Supercedes Prior Change in Control Severance Agreements.  The Executive acknowledges and agrees that
the benefits and terms set forth in the May 14, 2004 restatement of the Plan,
as applicable to the Participant based on the Tier designated in paragraph 1
above, are a replacement for and in lieu of any benefits to which the Executive
may have been entitled under the Plan prior to its restatement or under any
other agreement with the Company relating to Change in Control severance
benefits.  The Executive further
acknowledges such benefits and terms may be subsequently amended pursuant to
Section 7.1 of the Plan.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the date first above written.


 


	
  EXECUTIVE

  	
  ANDREW CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/ John E. DeSana

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Ralph E. Faison

  	
   

  
	
  , individually

  	
   

  	
  By: Ralph E. Faison

  
	
   

  	
  Its: President & Chief Executive Officer
C.X., The Father, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0290

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

APRIL 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Corey A. MINIX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1432

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed November 16, 2018

Corey A. Minix, Lake City, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

HARRIS, J.

Corey A. Minix appeals the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motions for postconviction relief. We affirm the summary denial of all grounds raised in Minix's motions, except ground six of his first motion. In that ground, Minix alleged that his plea was involuntary because his trial counsel failed to investigate and raise a prescription defense to the charge of trafficking in a controlled substance. The postconviction court denied this claim, finding that Minix's voluntary plea waived his right to present defenses to a jury. Relying on *Stano v. State*, 520 So.2d 278 (Fla. 1988), the postconviction court held that Minix was attempting to go behind his plea and precluded him from contesting any events that occurred prior to the plea.

The postconviction court's reliance on *Stano* is misplaced in that a general waiver of defenses is insufficient to refute a more specific claim. *See* *Prestano v. State*, 210 So.3d 772, 773 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). In this case, there was no specific discussion of the prescription defense during the plea colloquy and no indication that Minix was aware that a prescription defense could be a viable defense to the trafficking charges. *See* *O'Hara v. State*, 964 So.2d 839 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (extending prescription defense to prosecutions involving trafficking by possession); *see also* *Wagner v. State*, 88 So.3d 250, 252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ("A valid prescription is a complete defense to trafficking and a defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on this defense.").

"A trial attorney's failure to investigate a factual defense ... which results in the entry of an ill-advised plea of guilty, has long been held to constitute a facially sufficient attack upon the conviction." *Guzman-Aviles v. State*, 226 So.3d 339, 342 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (quoting *929*MacKinnon v. State*, 39 So.3d 537, 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) ). Since Minix had a potentially viable claim, he should have been given the opportunity to amend his rule 3.850 motion to allege the requisite prejudice required under *Hill v. Lockhart*, 474 U.S. 52, 58, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985). *See* Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2) ; *Spera v. State*, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007).

Therefore, we reverse the summary denial as to ground six only and remand to the trial court to grant Minix leave to amend his rule 3.850 motion to state a sufficient claim.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED.

ORFINGER and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.01**CERTIFICATION**I, Bruce L. Cleland, Chief Executive Officer of Campbell & Company, Inc., the managing owner ofCampbell Alternative Asset Trust (the “Trust”), do hereby certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Trust; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.         By:   /s/ Bruce L. Cleland    Bruce L. Cleland    Chief Executive Officer
STATE of Louisiana v. Tony Ray EVANS

NO. 2018-KO-0281

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 20, 2018

Denied.

CRICHTON, J., recused.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - science_education(17)
              - science_faqs(14)
              - science_science(751)
              - products_data(356)
              - products_maps(78)
              - products_publications(4311)
              - products_software(12)
              - products_web_tools(51)
              - multimedia_audio(105)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(96)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(9)
              - multimedia_before_after(17)
              - multimedia_image(1659)
              - multimedia_image-141769(49)
              - multimedia_image-141770(14)
              - multimedia_image-141771(1466)
              - multimedia_image-141772(11)
              - multimedia_image-141774(8)
              - multimedia_image-141775(73)
              - multimedia_image-141776(27)
              - multimedia_image-204460(5)
              - multimedia_image-207195(2)
              - multimedia_slideshow(20)
              - multimedia_video(419)
              - multimedia_video-149194(144)
              - multimedia_video-149195(141)
              - multimedia_video-149196(26)
              - multimedia_video-149197(35)
              - multimedia_video-149198(17)
              - multimedia_video-149225(7)
              - multimedia_webcam(22)
              - multimedia_webcam-141785(16)
              - multimedia_webcam-141786(4)
              - documents_file(41)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - documents_file-149208(6)
              - documents_file-149210(2)
              - documents_file-149212(1)
              - documents_file-149214(6)
              - documents_file-149216(4)
              - (-)documents_file-149217(1)
              - documents_file-149218(1)
              - documents_file-149220(10)
              - documents_file-149222(3)
              - news_news-149245(99)
              - news_news-149246(8)
              - news_news-149248(28)
              - news_news-149249(4)
              - news_news-149250(51)
              - news_newsletters(17)
              - news_other_news(101)
              - (-)connect_social_media(2)
              - connect_staff_profiles(104)
              - other_basic-37(3)
              - other_basic-42(55)

## By Location

              - texas(1)

## By Year

              - 2023(1)
              - 2022(1)

social mediaTexas Flood Watch

Training Materials        May 10, 2019        Tracking Change Over Time—River Flooding - Teacher

social mediaFloods News
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.10

                                  WEST GEORGIA
                                  NATIONAL BANK

                  AMENDMENT TO BONUS AND STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT

         For and in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, W. Galen Hobbs, Jr. ("Individual") and
WGNB Corporation ("Corporation") hereby amend the Bonus and Stock Option
Agreement between them dated as of September 23, 1998.

         Section 2.1 shall be changed to read as follows:

         2.1      Corporation grants to Individual the option to acquire shares
                  of the common stock of Corporation on an annual basis ("Option
                  Shares"), pursuant to the WGNB Corp. Incentive Stock Option
                  Plan ("ISO Plan") in an amount equal to 2 times the quotient
                  (rounded to the nearest whole share) which shall be determined
                  by dividing (a) the Cash Bonus due to Individual pursuant to
                  Section 1 for the applicable year, by (b) the Market Value Per
                  Share of the common stock of Corporation as the volume
                  weighted average closing price for the ninety calendar day
                  period ending with the date of the grant, except that the
                  grant date price shall be taken as of within an hour before
                  the time of the grant.

         All other terms and conditions of the Bonus and Stock Option Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect and are not changed in any manner by the
execution of this Amendment.

                                   Executed this 30 day of May, 2002.

                                   WGNB Corp.

                                   /s/ Richard A. Duncan
                                   -----------------------------------
                                   By:      RICHARD A. DUNCAN
                                   Its:     EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT

                                   Executed this 30 day of May, 2002.

                                   /s/ W. Galen Hobbs, Jr.
                                   -----------------------------------
                                   W. Galen Hobbs, Jr.
CAPITAL WEALTH ADVISORS, INC., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. CAPITAL WEALTH ADVISORS, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3659

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 24, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed. Each party is to bear their own attorneys' fees and costs. The February 5, 2019, oral argument in this case is canceled.